[SERF-498] Upgrade gorm to v2

[laynax]

Description

Works done:

• Replaced github.com/jinzhu/gorm with gorm.io/gorm (no go mod tidy yet)
• Replaced different drivers with gorm related drivers under gorm.io/driver/*
• Replaced custom gorm logger with gorm.io/gorm/logger along with tests.
• Introduced sqlmock, this way we can test logger more properly.

Testing considerations

Running docker-compose run --rm sdk mage test:run must be smooth.

Running new sdk update on chassis must go OK too:

go get github.com/scribd/go-sdk@laynax/SERF-498/upgrade-gorm
go mod tidy
docker-compose run --rm server mage test:run

Checklist

• Prefixed the PR title with the JIRA ticket code
• Performed simple, atomic commits with [good commit messages][commit messages]
• Verified that the commit history is linear and commits are squashed as necessary
• Thoroughly tested the changes in development and/or staging
• Updated the README.md as necessary

Related links

• SERF-498

[Neurostep]

Great work 👍 gorm introduced lots of changes and improvements

I did a first quick pass and placed some comments 💬

[Neurostep]

LGTM 🚀 Great work 👍

I would wait for another reviewer to approve, maybe they could spot something else 👀

Also, very good idea to test this PR in real life application (document-search) in a development environment before merging. Check logs, traces and overall update ✅

[Neurostep]

LGTM 🚀

[fotos]

👍 LGTM 🚀

[Neurostep]

LGTM 🚀

[laynax]

@fotos

Shouldn't we have the SQL as the message, like it was before (#58 (comment))? thinking If I remember correctly DataDog likes it better this way (when it displays the logs) but we have to (double) check that as well.
Overall I'm not sure I understand why we moved the SQL to a different key – was there a technical limitation or are the logs better displayed this way in DataDog?

Thanks for the review 🙏 (with a bit of a delay :) )
I don't remember the reason behind changing the key honestly, maybe I wanted to copy the way it's done in gorm default logger 🤷‍♂️
I reverted it back to the old sql key.

Also you mind sharing a DataDog link about SQL logging field, please?

[laynax]

To give an update on my comment regarding gorm's behavior on logging PII:
Having the Go code gormDB.Exec("SELECT id FROM users WHERE name = ?", "asd") will result in:

• No log on any log level than trace.
• Trace level, with error:
  {"level":"trace","message":"gorm DB Logger","sql":{"affected_rows":1,"duration":274989,"sql":"SELECT id FROM users WHERE name = ?"},"timestamp":"2023-02-16T10:51:05Z"}
• Trace level, without error:
  {"error":"test error","level":"error","message":"gorm DB Logger","sql":{"affected_rows":0,"duration":350073,"sql":"SELECT id FROM users WHERE name = ?"},"timestamp":"2023-02-16T10:51:05Z"}

[Neurostep]

LGTM 🚀

[laynax]

For posterity, here's a log example in document-search running on trace log level.